Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Legacy Halo

What's your most unpopular Halo opinion?

OP SeargentSa1t

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 4
  4. 5
  5. ...
  6. 6
ODST Blues wrote:
Aut0b0t117 wrote:
ODST Blues wrote:
If I could only pick one it would be reach. If you don’t like armor abilities don’t use them. If you don’t like the DMR don’t use it. If you don’t like a feature then custom games and forge is good if you have someone to play with. Or play firefight with customized settings.
I’ve got some counters to that:

1) In Matchmaking, you always spawn with a Armor Ability. If you don’t use them, then the enemy has a direct advantage over you. (This is different than Power Weapons and Vehicles, because they had to go grab those, while they spawned with their Armor Ability.)

2) Again, in Matchmaking, you usually spawn with a DMR and a Assault Rife. (At least in the primary game modes.) To not use the DMR is to give the enemy a direct advantage against you. (When it advantages, you wouldn’t use a DMR against a Shotgun in CQC, especially when a Assault Rife is available.)

3) Not everyone has friends who they can play with, so Custom Games is unreasonable for them.

4) Custom Firefight is completely different to fighting against other people.
I knew someone was going to call me out on this! I agree with you and I know that matchmaking is what it usually comes down to when asked what the best halo is. I’m just saying if you could go into custom games w/ players and or you enjoy firefight then you can turn off features people generally don’t like about reach. Or like halo 5... people don’t like many features but in custom games you can change things to your liking. To me that’s what makes a good halo game, customizable to your liking or just good w/out modifying. When the CGB (custom game browser) comes out for reach then having people for custom games won’t be a problem anymore... hopefully.
Yeah, when the Customs Browser comes out, I’ll be playing a lot more Reach. Say whatever you want about Reach, (As I have.) but you can’t deny that it’s got a stellar Forge, and brilliant Custom Game options.
Most unpopular in my opinion is halo 5 anything that 343 took from bungie everyone saying halo 3 is the worst should suck on stg cigar.
The battle rifle in halo 3 feels mushy n aint fun to use.
CE > 2 > Reach > ODST > 3 > everything else
ziggyjoker wrote:
I’ve always hated the multiplayer. Ever since the series started leaning more on PvP rather then the campaign or firefight, its been hard.
I really hate Halo 4 and 5 due to the AI enemies being annoying, frustrating, and not fun to fight against like the earlier games.
Now that's what's missing from those games.
idk why most people are against it, but halo 3 is just leaps and bounds more fun with sprint. a certain mod showed me the light and it just feels so right
-ODST is my favourite halo
-CE is overrated
-H5 MP was one of the best in Halo history
-the games feel better when you can sprint
doxua wrote:
idk why most people are against it, but halo 3 is just leaps and bounds more fun with sprint. a certain mod showed me the light and it just feels so right
I also think sprint was an improvement to the series. If i remember correctly its addition was highly criticized in part because of the fear that Halo might be trying to become more like COD, which was pushed more heavily in H4 honestly than anywhere else.
Mine is that the more I've played Reach over the years, the less I've liked it and I think it is extremely overrated due to nostalgia. To be fair, I played it 5 years ago when I was still pretty young so I do have some nostalgia for it, but looking at it critically I really don't like it as much as any of the first three games or ODST. It's just that way more sandbox elements were taken out than there were added, and the story, gameplay, level, and map design are basically inferior in every way to the previous games. I don't hate it, it's just that when I pop in MCC Reach is the one I'd least want to play, besides Halo 4.

What's your unpopular opinion?
I remember when Reach first hit, many players didn't like it in my friends group or even my xbox live sessions. I always thought it was pretty much hated from the start. I remember people not liking it for book reasons as it contradicted a lot in those. I guess my unpopular opinion is that the games take president over the books and I feel the books shouldn't dictate the games, because back then when pointing that out it was met with a lot of anger and many people not understanding why I didn't think books should be determining the direction and story of a video game that came first, of course the game is the prime there too. I notice that today, a lot more people seem to really like Halo Reach but I agree it is clunky and the scenes are very similar around reach that you almost feel like it's a backtrack at times even though much is very different. The Halo series has always done back tracking in one form or another and in H4 most of those scenery objects and backgrounds were so similar I might as well have backtracked to the locations from before. Strangest thing, HCE didn't feel that much of a backtrack and that is the game you actual backtrack in. Crazy.
I don't think Master Chief is as cool as most make him out to be.
Tanubi wrote:
Mine is that the more I've played Reach over the years, the less I've liked it and I think it is extremely overrated due to nostalgia. To be fair, I played it 5 years ago when I was still pretty young so I do have some nostalgia for it, but looking at it critically I really don't like it as much as any of the first three games or ODST. It's just that way more sandbox elements were taken out than there were added, and the story, gameplay, level, and map design are basically inferior in every way to the previous games. I don't hate it, it's just that when I pop in MCC Reach is the one I'd least want to play, besides Halo 4.

What's your unpopular opinion?
I remember when Reach first hit, many players didn't like it in my friends group or even my xbox live sessions. I always thought it was pretty much hated from the start. I remember people not liking it for book reasons as it contradicted a lot in those. I guess my unpopular opinion is that the games take president over the books and I feel the books shouldn't dictate the games, because back then when pointing that out it was met with a lot of anger and many people not understanding why I didn't think books should be determining the direction and story of a video game that came first, of course the game is the prime there too. I notice that today, a lot more people seem to really like Halo Reach but I agree it is clunky and the scenes are very similar around reach that you almost feel like it's a backtrack at times even though much is very different. The Halo series has always done back tracking in one form or another and in H4 most of those scenery objects and backgrounds were so similar I might as well have backtracked to the locations from before. Strangest thing, HCE didn't feel that much of a backtrack and that is the game you actual backtrack in. Crazy.
Definitely agree about the games’ continuity being more important than those of the books. Of all the complaints about Reach that I agree with, I find that one to be one of the weakest. I agree that the interpretation of a story from the original creators, in the same form of media as the source, should be the primary interpretation
Halo 2's hud makes me throw up in my mouth
ziggyjoker wrote:
I’ve always hated the multiplayer. Ever since the series started leaning more on PvP rather then the campaign or firefight, its been hard.
I really hate Halo 4 and 5 due to the AI enemies being annoying, frustrating, and not fun to fight against like the earlier games.
Now that's what's missing from those games.
I loved it way more when the mp was just an addition to the game and not a necessity. One of the reasons I really don't like Halo 5.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 4
  4. 5
  5. ...
  6. 6